<Beijing Youth Daily>, <Legal Evening News> and other
newspapers all thought that they had a great story that they deemed enough
to put on the front page.

On the Internet, the story was also popular! After
all, the story had all the key characteristics of forced
eviction/demolition, with the extra ingredient being the fact that the
victim was a corporate chief executive (Sun Yingui of Bailong) instead of a
powerless civilian:
- More than one hundred urban administrators were responsible of supervising
the demolition workers and maintain order.
- 230 persons from real estate companies, developers and neighborhood
offices in Haidian district held a meeting to discuss this case!
- It was reported that the neighbor of the Bailong boss bore a grudge and
reported the illegality of the villa.

However, the real story may be something completely
different as shown in this bill prepared by a public relations company.

Title: Bailong Travel print media promotion fees
Date: 2010-01-07 11:43:59
Dear president Huang,
How are you!
The public relations result report on the "demolition of Sun Yingui's villa"
on behalf of Bailong Travel has been completed. Many mainstream
Beijing newspapers reported this as their front page story. The total
advertising value exceeded 1 million yuan. In addition, the major
Internet portals are also carrying the report. Details are provided in
the attachment. Please pay the total amount of 169,060 yuan, which is
itemized as follows:
1. High-level media public relations fees: 50,000 yuan (for five Beijing
newspapers)
2. Newspaper headline stories: <Beijing Youth Daily>, <Beijing News>,
<Beijing Times> and other pages for 8,000 x 6 = 48,000 yuan
3. Newspaper inside full page stories five times for 5,000 x 5 = 25,000 yuan
4. Newspaper inside partial page stories 18 times for 2,000 x 18 = 36,000
yuan

[021] Top Ten Television Commercials In
Taiwan, 2009 (01/10/2010) (NOWnews)

In China, many cities including Changsha, Zhuzhou and
elsewhere adopted payment of bus fare with mobile phone. Recently, a
short video showed what happened in one case. In the video, the
passengers got on the bus and either used their mobile phones or tossed
coins. A young woman wearing sunglasses and a low-cut dress got on
with a bottled drink on her right hand and a cup in her left hand. How
was she going to pay the fare? She wore her mobile phone around her
neck, so she thrust her chest forward towards the scanner and made the
payment.

Behind this woman came a middle-aged woman wearing an
old-style jacket. She also thrust her chest forward towards the
scanner and wiggled twice. Nothing happened. The male driver
used Shanghainese to tell her: "Are you trying to use their mobile phone to
pay? If you don't have one, you should toss coins in!" The woman
replied: "What is the matter with you? The girl in front of me thrust
forward and you let her pass. I've already done this twice but you
won't let me pass. What's up? This is too much!"

The male driver lost his patience: "Alright, alright.
Go ahead. The other person was using a China Unicom mobile phone."
But the middle-aged woman would not give up. Even as she walked ahead,
she turned her head back and said contemptuously: "What brand? Never
heard of it. I use an Apple mobile phone!" Laughter could
be heard from inside the bus. The girl with sunglasses gave a smile.

This video has been watched more than 1.7 million times so
far. Of course, some netziens raised doubts about the authenticity of
the video because they thought that it was a commercial to promote the use
of mobile phones to make payments. The likelihood of such a
coincidence was simply too infinitesimal. But other netizens feel that
even if this was a commercial, it was still very creative in reminding
people: "The times are changing rapidly. Some people aren't even
aware about
mobile phone payment. Comrades, keep up with the times or else you are
OUT!"

A Chinese lawyer for a suspected mafia boss in one of the
nation's most high-profile trials was jailed on Friday, drawing warnings
from lawyers worried the government is trampling rules in its zeal for
convictions.

A court in the southwestern city of Chongqing gave Li
Zhuang two years and six months in prison on charges of falsifying evidence
and jeopardising testimony.

Police arrested Li, the defence lawyer for alleged gang
leader Gong Gangmo, late last year. Li was accused of telling Gong to lie in
court by testifying that he was tortured in detention, state media reports
said at the time.

...

Chinese newspapers have dubbed the case "Lawyer
fake-gate."

Chinese criminal defence lawyers have complained for years
that laws give scant protection for the accused and their advocates, and in
particular that provisions on evidence fabrication are vague and open to
abuse by police.

Zhang Kai, a Beijing lawyer who has been campaigning for
Li, said the sentencing set a bad precedent, threatening to further limit
access to the law for people charged with serious crimes. "Some people have
said Li Zhuang was helping criminal gangs. But all we are trying to do is
help the development of a proper legal system," he told Reuters by
telephone.

The legal field and the general public are paying
attention to the Chongqing trial of Li Zhuang for falsifying evidence.

The voices are actually highly similar. Outside
Chongqing, people tend to lean in favor of Li Zhuang. Perhaps
like-minded people think alike, or perhaps people with different opinions
are unable to let their voices be heard.

I have read the various doubts raised in the case against
Li Zhuang, including whether Li Zhuang was monitored illegally, or the
suspicious nature of the denunciation of Li Zhuang by his client Gong Gangmo,
or whether the evidence of crime is sufficient. This showed that the
doubts about the case cover just about every aspect. Some people are
saying that if we cannot get Li Zhuang off today, we may be the ones facing
the same kinds of charges tomorrow.

What an exaggerated statement! Is there a connection
between what happens to Li Zhuang and us? Are we the same type of
person as Li Zhuang? Even if I believe that the charges against Li
Zhuang are unfounded, will saving him protect all of us? Even if Li
Zhuang is just a commoner, he could not mean so much; in reality, there is
so much distance between Li Zhuang and us.

The law and its study are professional subjects that I am
not qualified to discuss. I am not qualified to analyze whether Li
Zhuang committed any crimes in his capacity as lawyer. No matter what
happens to Li Zhuang, it does not affect the legal status of commoners.

I have always thought that being a lawyer is an awkward
profession. To become a lawyer, one has to pass professional tests and
undergo annual reviews. In a courthouse, a lawyer is also in a
peculiar position. On one hand, the trial may have little or nothing
to do with any defense statements made in court, and this restricts the
usefulness of lawyers. On the other hand, the lack of judicial
independence makes lawyers important as lobbyists, especially if they have
connections and backgrounds. Their ties with judges or others who can
influence judges will have a huge bearing on the economic and social rewards
as lawyers.

What kind of lawyer was Li Zhuang? How did he come
to be charged? We already know that Li Zhuang previously went from
Beijing to many places to "salvage people" with many successes to show.
What kind of people did he salvage? Why did he salvage these people?
Perhaps, you say that you don't consider this to be a problem -- you don't
care who he salvaged or how he did it as long as it was legal. But I
have to ask whether the successes of Li Zhuang was because he was capable
and imbued with a passion for justice, or something else? How much did
the "background" which Li Zhuang mentioned himself play into it? And
what kind of background might that be?

To a certain degree, when Beijing lawyers like Li Zhuang
travel all over China to salvage people, it is a sickness in the rule of law
in China. It showed that connections, social resources, power
protection and other factors are influencing the course of justice.
The emergence of this sickness is not due to the so-called "Beijing lawyers"
per se, but these highly successful "Beijing lawyers" must have at least
actively and consciously leveraged these factors to their own advantage.

It is clear that these Beijing lawyers would not have gone
to "salvage" a commoner. The friends of these Beijing lawyers -- such
as those in the legal field and the general public -- are more willing to
offer their support for people who have deep pockets. They are more
willing to write "expert opinions" for people like Shenyang gang boss Liu
Yong and others. If you have money, you can hire experts to deliver
"expert opinions"; if you have money, you can hire "Beijing lawyers" to use
various social connections and influences to "salvage" you.

To a certain degree, the arrest of Li Zhuang is only one
setback for the "Beijing lawyers." If Li Zhuang is convicted, it will
affect the profession of lawyer negatively, especially the businesses of the
"Beijing lawyers" and the "Beijing legal field."

Of course, no matter what Li Zhuang did, he can only be
found guilty and punished in accordance with the law. Even if "Beijing
lawyers salvaging people" is a sickness of China, his case should still be
handled in accordance with the law and we will not praise anything else.

People have said quite a bit about whether the Chongqing
authorities have improperly prosecuted Li Zhuang, or whether this case will
erode the rule of law. I am willing to harbor reasonable doubts the
case of Li Zhuang and his defenders: If Li Zhuang is convicted, it may not
be a victory of the rule of law -- it may be precisely the defeat of the
rule of law; if Li Zhuang is found not guilty, it may only show the
importance of "background" once more.

Li ZHuang is Li Zhuang. He may have been prosecuted
because he got in the way. But he may get off because of some kind of
trade. There may not be much difference between someone with a
background and someone with no background. If someone with background
like Li Zhuang can be treated this way, it is easy to imagine what happens
to people with no such background. But you should not think that if
people like Li Zhuang can get their way as they please, then it would be a
good thing for commoners. That is the so-called "if we cannot get Li
Zhuang off today, we may be the ones facing the same kinds of charges
tomorrow" mentality. How naive must you be to think that?

A stand-up row between two maverick
lawmakers erupted in the Legislative Council in scenes more suited to
Taiwan's incendiary parliament.

As a stunned chamber looked on, Raymond Wong Yuk-man and
Chim Pui-chung stood toe-to-toe yesterday trading swearwords, personal
insults and political abuse for an astonishing four minutes. At the height
of the raging row, the pair went for each other's Achilles' heel with words
such as triad, convict and beggar being hurled.

It was not until Finance Committee chairwoman Emily Lau
Wai-hing warned they could be thrown out, and security guards moved in, that
the pair backed off in the unprecedented bust-up. They later apologized and
shook hands for the cameras.

But last night parents' and education groups said the
incident - which was quickly posted on YouTube and later taken down - had
set a bad example for young people and damaged the reputation of the
legislature.

The row flared during a debate over whether think-tank
Professional Commons should be allowed to express its views at today's
debate on funding for the Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link.

Referring to something League of Social Democrats member
Wong said, financial services representative Chim murmured: "How can you
bulls*** like that?" Wong replied: "I didn't."

Then, just as pro-rail link lawmaker Paul Tse Wai-chun was
about to speak, Chim jumped up from his seat and dashed to Wong, slammed his
hand on the desk and shouted: "What the hell do you want ...You think the
three of you [League Legco members] are the most supreme?"

Wong did not respond, but as Chim walked back to his seat
he said to Wong: "You think you are powerful being a triad?" Furious, Wong
stood up and yelled: "You better take back your words."

Lau tried in vain to suspend the meeting as Wong called
Chim "a convict." "Yes, I was," Chim retorted. "And you will be one sooner
or later." More insults and finger pointing followed with Chim calling Wong
"a triad affiliate" as the pair appeared close to blows.

Their confrontation continued as calls for order were
ignored, Wong called Chim a "dead convict" and Chim shouted: "How dare you
call me a beggar?" claiming Wong owed him money. In 1998 Chim spent 10
months in jail for forging share certificates and was stripped of his Legco
seat the same year.

Subsidized Secondary School Council vice chairman Liu Ah-chuen
said: "This anti-authority behavior will have a bad influence on the younger
generation. Teenagers tend to follow such bad models." Alliance of Parents
Associations chairwoman Chan Siu-chu said lawmakers should be aware of their
behavior. "Young people will initially think this is fun but in the long run
it will pervert the virtues of society," Chan said.

However, Youth Union convener Kong Kwai-sang disagreed.
"First and foremost, youths will focus on what they were arguing about in
the Legco," Kong said. "In politics arguments are quite normal so I don't
think this kind of behavior will have a great impact."

Yesterday at the Legislative Council, the pan-democrats
supported hearing the testimony of NGO experts about the Express Rail Link
project, but councilor Poon Pui-chyou (Federation of Trade Unions) said that
this would be unfair to other organizations. This led councilor
Raymond Wong Yuk-man (League of Social Democrats) to yell, "Give us some
help with the stall tactics, councilor Poon!"

Councilor Chim Pui-chung was clearly displeased with the
interjection from Wong and began to grumble from his seat. "How can
you just rant?" This displeased councilor Chan Wai-yip (League of
Social Democrats) who traded barbs while interrupting the speech by
councilor Tse Wai-chun. Chim then got out of his seat and walked
towards the three League of Social Democrats councilors. "What do you
people want? Are the three of you so fierce!" Session chairwoman
Emily Lau pleased: "Please do not quarrel. Councilor Chim, get back to
your seat!"

But Chim had no intention of withdrawing. Wong then
said, "Try again. I will offer you a cup for you to throw." Chim
responded to the provocation with: "Do you think you are fierce because of
your triad background!" This caused Wong to stand up and demand Chim
to withdraw his words. Chim continued his torrent of words.
Emily Lau then announced an adjournment because the situation was getting
out of control.

But the pair had no intention of holding a ceasefire.
Chim pointed at Wong: "If you are triad, you should admit it; if not, you
should deny it." Wong replied: "Of course I am not!" "But you
used to be!" Wong called Chim a "jailbird" to which Chim responded:
"Yes, but you will be one sooner or later!" Wong said angrily: "Do I
look scared? Am I scared that you have teeth! You drop dead in
the street! You go quickly and drop dead!"

Wong then called Chim a beggar. Chim said, "I am a
beggar, but I don't owe anyone money!" "So what if I owe people money?
What's it to you! I owed your mother money!" The security guards
surrounded the two men. Then Chan Wai-yip joined in and said: "I
formally challenge you. If you don't resign on January 27 with me, you
are a turtle hiding inside its shell." The episode lasted more than 4
minutes. Finally Emily Lau pounded the hammer and said: "If you want
to disrupt order again, you will be ejected." Chim wanted to continue
but Lau said: "Stop talking!"

Q1. How much do you know about the discussion of the
Express Rail Link (Hong Kong Section)?
4%: Very much
13%: Fairly much
22%: Half-half
28%: Quite little
31%: Very little
3%: Don't know/hard to say

Q2. There are different views on the choice of venues and
number of Express Rail Link stations. How much do you know about this?
3%: Very much
12%: Fairly much
17%: Half-half
30%: Quite little
35%: Very little
4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q3. The government is seeking Legislative Council funding
for HK$ 66.9 billion, which is equivalent to HK$10,000 per Hong Kong citizen,
for the Express Rail Link construction project. Are you inclined to
support or oppose the funding, or prefer to suspend it?
47%: Support
23%: Oppose
22%: Suspend
9%: Don't know/hard to say

Q1. The government proposes that the size of the
electoral committee for the election of the Chief Executive be expanded from
the current 800 to 1,200. Do you agree or disagree?
25.1%: Disagree/disagree a lot
60.6%: Agree/agree a lot
14.2%: Don't know/hard to say

Q2. Do you think that the increased size of 1,200 for the
electoral committee is too many, too few or just right?
45.8%: Too little
34.2%: Too many
7.6%: Just right
12.4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q3. The consultation paper suggests that the newly increased
400 electoral committee members shall consist of 100 each from the original
industry/commerce, finance, professional and society/political sectors.
Do you agree or disagree with this decision?
40.9%: Disagree/disagree a lot
47.2%: Agree/agree a lot
11.8%: Don't know/hard to say

Q4. A nominee for the Chief Executive must currently receive
100 votes from the 800 electoral committee members. The proposed reform
would maintain the threshold of 1/8. That is to say, the nominee must
received 150 votes from the 1,200 electoral committee members. Do you
agree or disagree with this proposal?
36.9%: Disagree/disagree a lot
50.5%: Agree/agree a lot
12.6%: Don't know/hard to say

Q5. Do you think that the threshold of 1/8 is too low, too
high or just right?
22.6%: Too low
40.4%: Just right
23.6%: Too high
13.4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q6. Some people think that the threshold for nominating the
Chief Executive in 2012 should not be higher than that for the 2007 Chief
Executive election, in order to allow candidates from different sectors
(including pan-democrats) to participate. Do you agree or disagree?
20.6%: Disagree/disagree a lot
72.0%: Agree/agree a lot
7.5%: Don't know/hard to say

Q7. As for the Legislative Council, the government proposes
to have five more directly elected seats from the geographical constituencies
in 2012. Do you agree or disagree with this proposal?
18.9%: Disagree/disagree a lot
73.8%: Agree/agree a lot
7.3%: Don't know/hard to say

Q8. The government also proposes to have five more seats
from the functional constituencies to be elected by the District Councilors
from amongst themselves. Do you agree or disagree with this proposal?
34.2%: Disagree/disagree a lot
56.7%: Agree/agree a lot
9.1%: Don't know/hard to say

Q9. Some people think that the government should eliminate
the system of direct appointment of district councilors. Do you agree or
disagree?
28.8%: Disagree/disagree a lot
64.6%: Agree/agree a lot
6.6%: Don't know/hard to say

Q10. Some people think that the constitutional reform
proposal from the government for 2012 is "a step forwards for democracy,"
while people think that it is "a step backwards for democracy." What do
you think?
40.3%: A step forwards for democracy
29.5%: A step backwards for democracy
13.2%: Neither
17.0%: Don't know/hard to say

Q11. Overall, do you think that the most recent
constitutional reform proposal from the government is to fast, too slow or
just right?
54.7%: Too slow
36.6%: Just right
1.5%: Too fast
7.2%: Don't know/hard to say

Q12. Do you support the Legislative Council passing this
constitutional reform proposal for 2012 from the government?
30.6%: Do not support/very much not support
50.8%: Support/very much support
18.6%: Don't know/hard to say

Q13. Some people think that the "proposed constitutional
reform from the government is the best possible under the current
circumstances." Do you agree or disagree?
59.6%: Disagree/disagree a lot
31.0%: Agree/agree a lot
9.4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q14. Some people think that "if the Legislative Council
votes down this 2012 constitutional reform proposal, it will lessen the
chances of having universal suffrage for the 2017 Chief Executive election and
the 2020 Legislative Council election." Do you agree or disagree?
43.2%: Disagree/disagree a lot
39.7%: Agree/agree a lot
17.1%: Don't know/hard to say

Q15. The National People's Congress Standing Committee has
already decided that there won't be double universal suffrage in 2012, but
universal suffrage is possible for the Chief Executive in 2017 and the
Legislative Council in 2020. Do you accept or reject this decision?
30.5%: Don't accept/very much don't accept
57.7%: Accept/very much accept
11.8%: Don't know/hard to say

Q16. The Special Administrative Region government points out
that the current consultation will only address the 2012 elections as
authorized by the central government. The 2017 Chief Executive election
and the 2020 Legislative Council election will be addressed by the next
administration. Do you agree or disagree?
45.0%: Disagree/disagree a lot
44.0%: Agree/agree a lot
11.1%: Don't know/hard to say

Q17. Since the SAR government has not recommended double
universal suffrage in 2012, do you agree or disagree with the insistence on
implementing double universal suffrage in 2012?
33.3%: Disagree/disagree a lot
52.7%: Agree/agree a lot
14.1%: Don't know/hard to say

Q18. When Hong Kong can have universal suffrage, do you
think that the functional constituencies should be retained or eliminated?
49.7%: Eliminated
37.1%: Retained
13.3%: Don't know/hard to say

Q19. Some people think that even when universal suffrage is
used to elect the Legislative Council, the functional constituencies can be
retained after some reforms. Do you agree or disagree?
37.0%: Disagree/disagree a lot
44.6%: Agree/agree a lot
18.4%: Don't know/hard to say

Q20. Some pan-democrats recommend to have five pan-democrat
Legislative Councilors to resign from each of the geographical constituencies
and run for re-election as a de facto referendum to express public opinion to
the government. Do you agree or disagree?
56.7%: Disagree/disagree a lot
28.1%: Agree/agree a lot
15.2%: Don't know/hard to say

I went to see <Avatar> today. There were no
directors, producers or actors present on stage, but this was the first time
that I heard applause in a movie house where the credits came on. Some
Chinese movie critics think that while the movie is not bad, parts of the
plot were too mundane. I completely disagree, because brute-force
eviction is unimaginable for audiences in other country because they think
that it can only happen on alien planets or in China. This is a great
movie. I give this movie the full score of 10 if seen in IMAX 3D.

<Avatar> affected me most deeply because of the visual
impact. Although the story plot is somewhat corny, the movie is
technically flawless. The CGI technique left us bemoaning our
inadequacies. Yesterday, another reporter asked me what I should learn
from <Avatar>. I didn't think that there was anything to learn,
because we are too far behind Hollywood in technology. Some netizens
estimate the gap to be 20 years. I think more like 100 years. I
use the same camera to film the 3D <Don Quixote>. From the 3D
perspective, we Chinese moviemakers can do what <Avatar> did. But the
technique by which <Avatar> captured the motions is completely missing in
China. I can only pay tribute humbly at this time. I am
concerned that <Avatar> will not do as well as <2012> at the box office,
because the latter fawned on the Chinese people and the end-of-the-world
prediction/shallow plot may pull in more money.

(Lu Chuan, director of <City of Life and Death> (Nanking!
Nanking!))

I felt as if I had gone back to my childhood and became a
small boy full of dreams ... but the simple story was flawless and the plot
was very engrossing. <Avatar> let us know that we lack not only just
in technology. Technology can be acquired. <Avatar> let me
realized how far our movies are from simple perfection; how far our movies
are from crystal-clear purity; how far our movies from passionate dreams;
how far from genuine sincerity are we who are embroiled in grim
entanglements and dim vulgarity! We ought to ashamed in the face of
the purity of <Avatar>. This is a complete defeat that we Chinese
filmmakers must collectively witness and concede.

(Ning Caishen)

I went to watch the midnight showing of <Avatar> with
several directors and producers. Afterwards, the atmosphere was eerie,
silent and depressing. Almost nobody talked about this movie. We
were all shell-shocked.

In Binzhou (Shandong province), the Chinese Elementary and
Secondary School Logistics Support Forum in progress in a huge conference
call that cost millions of yuan to construct. Within a few minutes
after the Binzhou city leader announced the commencement, something
incredible happened -- the participants almost all fell asleep even as the
experts on the podium spoke!

Cyberbullying can kill. The video <Hong
Kong girl causes stir at Yuen Long construction material shop> had
been popular a while ago. The uploader was denounced as a "Kong girl"
and had her personal details ferreted out by netizens. The female
principal Chiu Yin-ping spoke out for the first time yesterday. She
said that after being verbally harangued and exposed, she felt like
committing suicide. A scholar said that most netizens do not realize
that their actions constituted cyberbullying that might drive the principal
into desperate straits. Therefore, this is a worrisome situation.

Chiu Yin-ping, who has been denounced as a "Kong girl" by
netizens, had an argument with a construction store manager over the price
of a wash basin in September and uploaded a video of that episode onto the
Internet. At first, she wanted to use the netizens to go after the
store manager. Instead, many netizens found her aggressive and
overbearing. They dug up a lot of information about her personal life,
and posted information such as photos, work details, addresses, etc onto the
various discussion forums.

Three months later, Chiu Yin-ping was interviewed for the
first time to comment on the affair. She said that she was emotionally
distraught after the exposure and did not dare to see anyone.
"Clinics, banks ... I try my best not to go there, because it is possible
that someone there will know that I am that person (Chiu Yin-ping). I
don't know what they might do, such as writing about me on the Internet."
The affair vexed her a great deal, to the point of contemplating suicide.

When she saw the netizen reactions, she was sorry and
immediately deleted the uploaded video. She apologized openly on her
blog: "I rashly did something that that hurt people. I am really sorry
for causing those by my side to worry." But certain netizens had
already downloaded her video, and they kept uploading it again and again to
generate more discussion.

City University Department of Applied Social Studies
associate professor Dennis Wong Shing-wing pointed out that someone of Chiu
Yin-ping's age could hardly be suicidal, so it is easy to imagine what a
blow it had been. He said that netizens are often affected by group
action -- "if others can do it, so can I" -- and therefore do not think of
themselves as cyberbullies who can ruin someone. This is really very
dangerous.

Wong Shing-wing said frankly that this type of
cyberbullying is literally "building one's own happiness upon the pain of
others." He explained that many people derive pleasure and
satisfaction in cyberbullying others. Sometimes they think that their
action will not have consequences beyond "their suffering is my enjoyment."
Sometimes they even regard the "outing" exercise as a competition to see who
could obtain more information and gain recognition on the Internet.

Wong Shing-wing said that some of them may have been
bullied in real life. Therefore, they want to seek redress on the
Internet. Alternately, they feel bored and want to have some "fun"
irregardless of how others feel. Even when something goes awry, they
will argue "everyone does it" to lessen their sense of guilt.

(Note of explanation: "Kong girl 港女"
means "Hong Kong girl" but, more importantly, it is the derogatory term for
a materialistic, greedy, overbearing, superficial, vain, egotistical and
insensitive woman.)

We have forgotten about this bitch already. She
wants to come out again and play the victim. She is going to be
stabbed again by HK Golden people.

Anyone who really wants to kill themselves won't say so;
those who say that want to kill themselves want to be asked to live.
Get lost!

Just do it!

Drop that, Kong girl! You wanted to cause someone
to lose his job for a few dollars? You are fucking despicable!
You deleted the video after a few minutes. Even you knew how fucking
stupid that was.

Earth is over-populated -- one less person won't hurt.

If she took the chance to say for this news story that
she had been wrong, I would sympathize with her, but she didn't.
Clearly, she is trying to look pitiful in order to gain sympathy. She
is even more evil than us.

I am a pacifist but leaving people like her alive will
only torment others and create more like her. Besides, if you want to
die, you should fucking die already. There is not need to talk so
much.

Did she want to get netizen attention before? She
has now succeeded.

When is she going to commit suicide? I want to buy
a bottle of champagne to celebrate.

She put the photo of the shop manager on the Internet so
that netizens can bully him. What is the difference between her and
her harassers?

If I were the shop manager, I would say that I wanted to
die at the time. Let see who is fucking more awesome then!

I thank Cable TV for rubbing more salt on Ms. Chiu's
wounds.

She gives a press interview, and HK Golden Forum is
completely plastered with posts about Chiu Yin-ping. She is looking to
be insulted.

Reis was born in Macau which was then a Portuguese colony.
Reis is of mixed ancestry as her father is Portuguese and her mother is a Han
Chinese from Shanghai. Michelle maintains, however, that she considers herself
Chinese as that was the only culture and language she grew up familiar with.
Reis attended Maryknoll Convent School, and matriculated from St. Paul's
Secondary School. Reis started modelling at the age of 14. She first came to
fame when she won the 1988 Miss Hong Kong Pageant at the age of 18. Reis was
also the first Miss Chinese International in the same year. Following her Miss
Chinese International crowning, she went on to participate in the Miss World
1988 pageant, where she promoted the image of Hong Kong. She was then supposed
to compete in the Miss Universe 1989 pageant but withdrew due to health
problems. Reis started to build a career within the entertainment industry in
the 1990s. She starred in commercials eventually leading to movies. She has
also appeared in music videos and TVB television episodes. Reis married
business tycoon Julian Hui on 23 November 2008, following a very public
two-year courtship.

Yes, but so what? Michelle Reis' Chinese name is
pronounced Li Jiaxin(李嘉欣), and Jiaxin
(嘉欣) happens to have the sound as (加薪)
(='salary raise').

Michelle Reis probably never imagined that she would
become the spokesperson for the broad masses of office workers in mainland
China. A CCTV news segment said: "On the posters of star Michelle
Reis, the words 'I want Jiaxin' are written. The posters are placed on
their desks as well as the walls that the bosses will pass by. This is
the trick by which white-collar workers are expressing their desire for
'salary raises'."

[011] More Action News
(01/04/2010) There are some reports that YouTube is accessible in
mainland China again. So here are some of the latest Apple Daily Action
News animated news reports.

Long after Tiger Woods has been forgiven his
transgressions, one lasting legacy of his extramarital activities will be a
new journalistic art form: the animated news report. Millions of people have
now viewed the online animations produced by Hong Kong-based Next Media
depicting the wronged wife coming after Tiger Woods with a golf club and
smashing the back window of his vehicle, causing the now-famous accident.

This may or may not be what actually happened, but one
lesson of technology applied to information is that every medium finds its
ultimate conclusion, from talk radio to reality television. In the case of
online video, animated "news" will fill the gap where there is no actual
video. (If you've somehow missed this animation, view it at
http://tinyurl.com/YL9H6X6).

Journalistic traditionalists tut-tut; animations are not
re-enactments so much as a potential version of the news. Even leading
new-media journalists are ambivalent. Kara Swisher, who blogs at the
Journal's All Things Digital Web site, quipped, "It's not pretty, but it is
hard to avert my eyes from the bizarre video report," comparing it to a
video game "gone awry." She said she couldn't tell "whether such faux
representations of how news might or might not have happened is a good or
bad thing."

These animations are the latest brainstorm of Jimmy Lai,
the founder of Next Media, which launched what are now the most popular
Chinese-language newspapers in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Reflecting on how
newspaper stories have more background about events than television news
reports have, as he told me last week, "I thought, hey, why not make those
missing images of the background into animated images?" He hired 160
software developers and engineers in Taiwan, who spent more than two years
perfecting the technique. Reporters describe their interpretation of what
happened to engineers and actors who serve as the models for the animation.
Mr. Lai says that his team can create an animated video in 90 minutes,
producing about 20 a day.

Mr. Lai says there's no confusing the animation with real
video. "The avatars are still quite wooden looking," he said, though he
plans to make them more realistic as the technology improves. Still, viewers
need to be discriminating, keeping in mind the difference between enactments
and real footage.

[010] Top News Stories
For Hong Kong Middle School Students (01/04/2010) (Oriental
Daily) Hok Yau Club obtained recommendations from 25 schools and
came up with a list of 30 news stories. From December 2 to 29, they
interviewed more than 80,400 students from 97 middle schools and asked them to
vote for the top 10 stories of the year. Because the respondents are
from Hong Kong, some of their choices would reflect Hong Kong issues that
would be alien to people in mainland China or Taiwan; and because they are
middle students, their choices would be different from older people.

[009] The State of
EastSouthWestNorth (01/04/2010) EastSouthWestNorth first began
in April 2003 when I moved back to Hong Kong from New York City. In
April 2006, the hosting service was changed from Yahoo! to Dreamhost. At
this time, I only have the standard Dreamhost web server statistics report to
look at.

If you take these numbers and divide by the number of days
per year, you can the average daily page views:
2006: 11,655
2007: 14,184
2008: 16,193
2009: 20,731

Page views don't mean much to me. No advertising is
shown on this website (unless they be public service notices), nor will it
ever be. By a simple tweak of the website design, page views can easily
be doubled or tripled, but life is too short. I'd rather translate some
more interesting things.

(I was not surprised that <Small Reunions> was selected among
the Best Ten Books Of the Year amid controversy. Eileen Chang
completed <Small Reunions> when she was in her 50's. As readers or
critics, we should accept the evolution of a writer. After reading
something good from her, we should not prohibit her from developing and
changing or become unhappy when she does change. Now that <Small
Reunions> has been published, further debate is pointless. The most
important thing at this time is to explore the literary value of this novel
and the new map for post-<Small Reunions> studies of Eileen Chang.

[ESWN Comment: This is China, so things do not have to be
true just because they were published somewhere. In this case, I never
made any comments to anyone about any Best Ten Book Of The Year List.]

This is a photo that I found on the Internet. It may
have been taken during a police sweep of prostitutes. I had many mixed
feelings when I saw it and I have so many things that I want to say about
it. Let me begin with the information imparted by this photo.

This pair of handcuffed hands is a pair of rough female
hands. This meant that the hands must have toiled in labor. She might
have worked in a farm field or a factory. Perhaps the land that she
used to till to feed her family has been sold by the government to real
estate developers and she lost her land; or perhaps the factory where she
earned her wages has been converted into a private enterprise by the leaders
and she was laid off because she was a burden on the new bosses. Her
land is gone, and her means of livelihood is gone. To feed her family,
she has to resort to the most primitive occupation for women.

This is pair of breasts that had fed her children.
Her children waits for her to feed them. She has to pay the high
tuition fees. This jobless mother had to use her body to exchange for
these things.

At her age, she must have elderly people to take care of.
The elders need the daughter to look after them. Perhaps the elders
are ill, and the high medical expenses await the daughter to pay. In
order to pay for the doctor bills and medical fees, she had to go down this
path of humiliation.

Although the eyes are pixelated, her facial expression
showed that she has not knuckled under. She does not think that she is
lowly. She is loftier than the corrupt officials who feed off the
blood of the people. Although she was forced to lift up her shirt and
let her breasts be fondled at will, she refused to lower her head. She
showed contempt for the hands that intrude upon her sexual organs in the
name of authority. She knew that he dared to touch her breasts only
because he wore a uniform. He is even more shameless than her.

This is a pair of male hands that would not dare to fondle
any other woman's breasts. The shirt sleeves show that they belong to
a male policeman. They are toying around with their prey.
Because his uniform represents law and authority, he can fondle at will all
those spots that are otherwise prohibited by the law.

This pair of hands represents the law. Not only is
it willfully invading female sexual organs that are prohibited by the law,
it can also be photographed by his companions for fun in order to
demonstrate its power and authority. This move only insults and
invades the character and dignity of the woman even more.

The big character "Police" on the top right hand corner of
this photograph showed that this was not taken at the scene of the crime.
Instead, it was a fun photo taken at the police station by the law-and-order
enforcers. The fuzzy shadows on the background appear to belong to a
group of police spectators.

I don't want to comment too much. I only want to
tell you about the information that I read from this photo. I may have
misunderstood something, but I want to bring this up for discussion.

Dear friend, what do you see from this photo? Let us
discuss.

[The first commentator wrote: You idiot, can't you see
that it was a man?]

[Note: This photo came from a November 17,
2006 story, in which two men wearing wigs and false boobs were
arrested after soliciting an undercover policeman in Fuzhou.]

Every time there's a protest
march, everyone wants to know how many took part. But police, organisers and
neutral observers have never agreed on the numbers, and probably never will.

The inflation, or underestimation, of the size of the
crowd was on show again in Friday's march for universal suffrage. Its
organiser, the group Power For Democracy, said 30,000 people took part in
the march from Causeway Bay to Sheung Wan. Police said about 6,800 people
were in Victoria Park for the start of the march and that 9,000 gathered at
its destination, the central government's liaison office.

That may appear a big gap, but it is far from the biggest.
When the Civil Human Rights Front staged the second big pro-democracy march
from Causeway Bay on July 1, 2004, it said 530,000 people took part; police
put the number at 200,000. The July 1 march has since become an annual
event, and last year organisers said 76,000 marched whereas police said only
28,000 took to the streets.

Researchers from the University of Hong Kong's public
opinion programme have done their own count of participants in the July 1
marches since 2003. The programme estimated turnout in 2004 at between
180,000 and 207,000; last year its estimate was that between 29,000 and
33,000 marched. Both estimates were much closer to the figure given by the
police than that of organisers.

Richard Tsoi Yiu-cheong, convenor of Power For Democracy
and a July 1 march regular, said organisers took the peak attendance at a
protest as their point of reference and took into account factors such as
the number of people that roads along the route of a march could
accommodate. Tsoi said the police always tended to underestimate turnout by
not counting those who came late or left early.

He conceded, though, that because the group's resources
were limited, its volunteers carried out headcounts of marchers on Friday at
only two spots in Central and Western District. "We will not say our
estimate is the most accurate one but it is a reference for the public and
the government, showing that our calls for democracy are shared by the
masses," he said.

Police consistently say the figures they issue are not
official head counts but estimates for internal use for crowd control
purposes. A spokesman said the force's counting method was "very
systematic", with observation spots set up on flyovers. The force releases
its highest estimate of turnouts.

Professor Paul Yip Siu-fai, an HKU statistician and
part-time member of the government's Central Policy Unit think tank, said
protest organisers and the media were "overly concerned about turnout". He
has estimated the turnout for all the July 1 rallies and says his figures
are often similar to those of the police, while organisers' figures are
often twice or three times his own. Yip said the media often paid more heed
to organisers' figures because they were usually more impressive. "Such huge
gaps are uncommon for protests in developed countries," he said. "People are
not so nervous about protest turnouts in other parts of the world."

Whether it is June 4, July 1 or any other mass
gatherings or demonstrations, the headcount figures announced by the
organizers and government units often show a huge difference. Director of
POP Robert Chung have the following impressions after conducting totally
16 headcounts over the past 7 years:

All organizers tend to exaggerate their headcounts,
while government units tend to underestimate the turnout. Using June 4
vigils as an example, the organizer's headcounts are usually 2 to 3
times that of the police figures.

Since both parties do not reveal their methodologies
and detailed figures, there is no way people can monitor the process or
check the results. The degree of scientificity and amount of
exaggeration can hardly be estimated.

Interestingly, when measuring the same kind of
activities over the years, although the headcount figures are so
different from both parties, their trend of change is very consistent.
We can therefore infer that the figures announced by organizers must
have included some political and psychological factors which blow up
their true values, while the government figures must have included some
factors which compress the true figures. If there is basically no change
in the ways the figures are stretched or compressed, then the direction
of change across different years may be true, while the headcount
figures themselves are not.

At certain times for certain activities, the
differences between organizers’ figures and government figures are
reduced, probably because both parties are expecting some headcount
figures compiled by third parties. “Third parties” here means various
scholars and experts who occasionally conducting headcounts. However,
because these headcounts are irregular, and not meant to be official
audits, they have set very little pressure on the relevant parties.

Before our society takes scientific headcount figures
seriously, when reporting these figures, it would be better for our media
to add expressions like “according to organizers’ claim”, “police
estimates”, and “method unknown” when quoting them.

[Comment: Robert Chung attributed inflation by the
organisers to "some political and psychological factors" and deflation by
the government to "some factors." Why do politicians have
psychological needs to inflate numbers?]

The Public Opinion Programme (POP) at the University of
Hong Kong conducted a headcount of the January 1 Rally organized by the
Power for Democracy at the Walkway System on the footbridge of
Central-Mid-Levels Escalator at the joint of Queen's Road Central and
Cochrane Street in Central on January 1, 2010. Headcount figures showed
that, excluding those who left the rally before the march arriving the
checkpoint or joined the march after it, 8,774 people passed by the
checkpoint. According to our previous data, it is estimated that the total
number of participants of the January 1 Rally should be in between 10,000
and 12,000.

The adjustment factor was found by making reference to
similar rallies out of the 20 mass demonstration headcount projects
involving POP since the July 1 Rally in 2003. Although the nature, the
route and the checkpoint of each rally may not be the same, the adjustment
factor is indeed very similar with other rallies of the same type. Prior
to obtaining other data, it should be applicable to this year's January 1
Rally.

Chenzhuang village is located in the suburbs of Liaocheng
city, Shangdong province. The village has more than 400 households
with more than 2,000 persons. The village covers more than 1,000 mu of
land. There are more than 600 housing lots with more than 2,340
buildings. The Dongchangfu district government wants to acquire the
land for commercial real estate development. However, the
demolition/relocation notice did not specify the purpose or title for the
project.

The lawyer for the villagers said that the
demolition/relocation project is illegal. All the
demolition/relocation notices and the compensation documents came without
official stamps. On audio recording, several Dongchangfu district
leaders have said that the project was "reasonable and legal," but they
could not furnish the relevant documents. Deputy district leader Guo
claimed first that "the procedures will be completed after the demolition"
and then he said "anything that government does is reasonable and legal."

On January 1st, the front page of the local news page
quoted a Dongchangfu district leader who said: "I will put you in jail!"
According to a village brigade leader, this is the same deputy district
leader Guo who was it.

How to get the villagers to accept the deal and clear out?
There are more than forty government workers who have relatives in
Chenzhuang village. They have been told that since their relatives
have not signed agreements, they will be "dismissed" from their jobs.

Chenzhuang village number one brigade leader Chen Jialiang
does not dare take the telephone calls from his brother-in-law. He
said that the brother-in-law Lu Hongyuan is a deputy director at the
Dongchangfu District Petition Office. On the day before yesterday, Lu
came out of a meeting and kept calling Chen Jialiang to beg him to sign the
agreement. According to Lu, the district leader Meng Lai announced to
the various department heads that any government worker with relatives in
Chenzhuang village will be "dismissed" if they cannot accomplish the mission
of convincing their relatives to sign before January 1st. Lu Hongyuan
said that he received a call from the district leader that if Chen Jialiang
does not sign today, Lu will be dismissed. "Don't bother showing up
for work."

According to villager Xu Hongdong, the villagers have more
than 40 relatives holding government jobs. All have received the same
notice like Lu Hongyuan.

According to villagers, the village broadcasting system
continues to broadcast demolition/relocation notices from 8am to 6pm.
Some villagers have recorded the broadcast message. The message asked
the villagers to cooperate with the demolition/relocation, which has more
than 99% of the villagers already signing. It also asked the villagers
to recognize the true status and not be "misled by the two lawyers from the
outside and harbor any illusions about the compensation." According to
the lawyer, more than 200 households have signed the power-of-attorney form
with him. That would be half of all the households.

British drug smuggler Akmal Shaihk died by lethal
injection on December 29, 2009 in Urumqi for carrying more than 4 kilograms
of heroin. Before his sentence was carried out, his defense lawyer and
the British government pleaded for mercy on the grounds that "Akmal Shaikh
suffered from mental illness." But the Chinese judiciary ultimately
decided that Akmal Shaikh did not suffer from mental illness. On
December 30, a Beijing-based criminal law expert gave a detailed
explanation.

Chinese Academy of Society Sciences Criminal Law Research
Centre director Qu Xuewu said that there are two standards for determining
whether the suspect/defendant has mental illness. The first is a
psychological standard by which the principal is determined to be unable to
comprehend the nature of his/her own actions. The second is a medical
standard which includes serious psychiatric illnesses such as schizophrenia.

"The Chinese court judiciary has its own standards for
determining mental illness. What ordinary people call personality
disorders, abnormal personality, paranoia and other irregular behaviors do
not qualify under those standards. Thus, the suspect cannot be excused
of the appropriate criminal responsibility as a result of those conditions."
Qu Xuewu said.

Before Akmal Shaikh was executed, his defense lawyer
appealed on the grounds that he suffered from mental delusions such that he
was tricked by a crime organization into bringing drugs into China.
The Supreme People's Court noted in its public notice on the decision for
the final appeal that British government officials and a certain Reprieve
organization made the request through the lawyer to have a psychiatric
examination done for Akmal Shaikh. But the material provided by the
British side was insufficient to show that Akmal Shaikh had mental illness
or that his family members have mental illness. Akhal Shaikj did not
offer any relevant material himself either.

The public notice from the Supreme People's Court also
noted that the a defendant cannot apply for a psychiatric examination
unconditionally. Instead the appellant must provide a basis that the
defendant may be suffering from mental illness. The court can then
evaluate and decide whether and examination needs to be made. In the
case of Akmal Shaikh, the court determined that there was no reason to doubt
his mental state. Therefore, the application for a psychiatric
examination failed to meet the conditions for approval.

Qu Xuewu explained that the conditionality required for a
psychiatric examination is based upon practical considerations. At
present, a large number of suspects (especially those suspects who are
facing execution) are requesting psychiatric examinations. Clearly,
people want to pretend to have mental illness in order to evade legal
responsibility. Therefore, the courts cannot approve all requests for
psychiatric examination unconditionally.

"The public notice from the Chinese judiciary noted that
the basic conditions for suspecting whether Akmal Shaikh were not met in
order to conduct a psychiatric examination, not to say a reprieve on the
grounds of mental illness. Therefore, the condemnations of the British
government about the lack of a psychiatric examination for Akmal Shaikh are
completely unfounded." Qu Xuewu said.

On December 28, cracks were seen on the Henan Road Bridge
over Suzhou River in Shanghai. The striking part of the phenomenon was
that the cracks revealed that the bridge had been stuffed with garbage (such
as plastic bubbles, canvas bags) inside. According to engineering
experts, the bridge is structurally sound and the garbage is only padding
underneath the decorative façade.

Following this popular Internet news story, the Shanghai
City Construction and Transportation Commission has determined the reason for
the cracks is that there should have been space left between the decorative
boards to account for different levels of movement. However, the
constructor did not do so, and this has resulted in the cracks appearing.
However, the bridge itself is structural sound and traffic safety is not
affected. The Commission has ordered the relevant department to improve
on the decorative design and make suitable repairs.

At around 3pm on December 28, Shenge Lighting Decoration
Factory boss Xu Hao went out to purchase spare parts. After walking
less than 1 kilometer, he felt sharp stomach pains. So he abandoned
his shopping trip to go to the Guzhen People's Hospital. The doctor
determined that he had a case of acute appendicitis and needed to be
hospitalized for treatment. Our reporter saw that the time of
admission on his hospital form was 4pm.

Xu Hao said that the doctor gave him an intravenous drip
which continued until 1am. He called his wife to tell her that he was
hospitalized. But before he could tell her to go to the factory, the
phone battery was exhausted. He asked the doctor to call his factory
manager, but the doctor said that he should rest and the factory manager can
take care of things.

On the afternoon of December 29, Xu Hao's wife Leng
returned to Guzhen from her hometown. She came first to visit Xu at
the hospital at 2pm and then went to the factory at 4pm. Leng
said: "When I got to the gate, I saw many people removing my property.
When I went up to stop them, they asked me who I was." She told the
movers that she is the female owner of the factory. But the movers
said that they had bought the factory and therefore they are the owners now.
Leng called the police. The police came followed by workers from the
Guzhen Neighborhood Safety Committee. The moving was stopped. Xu
Hao hurried back from the hospital. When he saw the scene at the
factory, he fainted and was sent back to the hospital again.

Here is what happened.

Shenge Lighting Decoration Factory has 16 workers.
According to worker Xu Yongqiang, several suppliers came to the factory to
demand payment after Xu went out on the afternoon of December 28. The
workers told them that the boss had gone out to purchase spare parts and
will be back soon. The suppliers waited from 4pm until past 5pm but Xu
Hao had not come back. The workers and the suppliers called Xu's
telephone but it had been turned off. Someone became concerned that Xu
had fled with the money. This notion spread among the suppliers as
even more of them heard and came to the factory. At 6pm or so, some of
the suppliers began to remove merchandise, equipment and office supplies
from the factory.

According to worker Huang Dechao, seven or eight suppliers
came on the afternoon of December 28 with seven or eight trucks parked in
front of the factory. They began to move what they regarded as
valuable onto their trucks. The workers tried to stop them, but the
suppliers ignored them. The landlord named Liang happened to pass by
and called the police. The Neighborhood Safety Committee and Labor
Department workers also came and the suppliers were stopped. Most of
the materials that were loaded onto the trucks were retrieved, but some
suppliers managed to take materials away.

That evening, the Neighborhood Safety Committee and the
landlord organized people to keep guard at the factory. By now the
workers were suspicious whether their boss had fled. Worker Lin
Yingjie said that the factory was scheduled to pay people on December 31.
Besides, they all had to post one month's pay as deposit up front.
This meant that the workers were owed two months' pay. Lin Yingjie
said: "We only make one or two thousand a month. We have families to
look after. This is our blood-and-sweat money. We want it back."
The 16 workers were due about 50,000 yuan. BUt Xu Hao was out of
contact that night. His wife Leng does not manage factory affairs and
the workers did not know how to reach her.

On the morning of December 29, the workers did not work.
At 10am or so, two workers from the Labor Department came. The local
Neighborhood Safety Committee sent people to maintain order. According
to Lin Yingjie and two other factory workers, the Labor Department worker
said: "If we you through labor arbitration or the judicial process, it will
take a long time for you to get paid. If you sell off the factory
assets, you can get paid quickly." A worker told the reporter that the
Labor Department worker gave them an agreement and said that their signing
would allow them to be paid immediately. At around 11pm, 10 workers
signed the agreement and received 1,375 yuan each.

Yesterday afternoon, this reporter was able to read the
agreement document. It read: "The operator Xu Hao has fled without a
trace and is out of reach, while still owing Cao Wen and 15 workers the
wages for November and December, 2009. In consideration of the
livelihood of the workers, the various sides have agreed unanimously that
the workers will sell off all the assets of the factory for a sum of 15,000
yuan. The landlord will contribute an additional 7,000 yuan for a
total 22,000 yuan to pay for the wages. The workers have agreed
unanimously that the wages will be distributed equally at 1,375 yuan per
person. The workers will go after the operator for the balance.
The workers shall depart from the factory as soon as they receive the
money."

In truth, the assets of Xu Hao's factory was sold off to
someone else for 15,000 yuan at around 11am on December 29. In 19
hours' time, Xu Hao's 300,000+ yuan investment in his factory had become
someone's else property.

Here are the stories from the various sides:

Xu Hao: The factory assets belong to me. Without me
being aware, they were sold off. We were absent from the factory for a
brief period, but the workers, the landlord and the Labor Department dispose
of our assets. Even if a government department wants to dispose of
private property, there should be a due process of law. They cannot
just use an agreement which has no legal basis whatsoever to sell off our
factory.

The workers: Out of the 16 workers, 5 are still there.
Workers Lin Yingjie and Xu Yongqiang told the reporter that the workers did
not come up with the agreement. Rather the Labor Department workers
gave it to them to sign. Xu Yongqiang said that the workers were all
anxious to get paid and they were not familiar with the law to know what to
do. A worker said that the Labor Department workers told them that it
would take a long time to get paid through labor arbitration or judicial
process; but they can get their wages quickly if they sell off the factory
assets. Xu Yongqiang said that most workers signed the agreement
because they wanted to get paid quickly.

Labor Department: We do not have the right to dispose of
assets. Our workers did not advocate the selling of the assets of the
Shenge Lighting Decoration Factory. Only when the buyers began to move
the assets out did the workers show us the agreement. We went to the
factory to tell the workers that they must solve the problem through labor
arbitration or judicial process, but they refused to listen. The
landlord called the police to say that the boss had fled. That was why
Labor Department workers went out there. All the workers, including
the manager, did not deny that the boss had fled. There is presently
no legal definition as to how to ascertain the owner has fled (such as the
length of absence).

<Huashi Metropolis News> (Sichuan province) and <Qingdao
Morning News> (Shandong province) reported in January that the Chinese navy
fleet sent to provide escort services around Somalia were followed by an
unidentified submarine, but they were able to force that submarine to
surface. This story drew international attention until it was
discovered that the story was fabricated by a freelance writer. The
responsible managers at the two newspapers were suspended/dismissed.

(2) Film rating system to be introducted in China

<Beijing Business News> cited State Film Bureau director
Tong Gang on February 2 that China intends to introduce a film rating
system. This was found to be a fake news based upon an old story five
years ago. Tong Gang said that he had never been interviewed about any
film rating system.

(3) Financially distressed boss eliminate redundant
mistresses

<Peninsula Metropolis News> (Shangdong province) reported
a sensationalistic story on February 15. A certain company boss was in
financial trouble and held three elimination rounds for this five mistresses
in order to keep the final winner. This was exposed as fiction.

(4) 0.4% of rich people own 70% of the wealth

<People's Political Consultative Conference News>
published an article in June that pointed out the trend towards inequality
of wealth. It reported that 0.4% of the richest people control 70% of
all wealth. This report was criticized by the central government for
having no factual basis.

(5) Obama gives an iPhone to Kim Jong-il

<Global Times> reported on August 10 that American
president Barack Obama will be giving an Apple computer and an iPhone to Kim
Jong-il. The story was originally reported in a spoof column in <The
Guardian> (UK) but <Global Times> took it for real.

(6) Chen Yonggui's son arrested for involvement in drugs and
gambling

Beijing-based <The Collector> reported that Chongqinq's
biggest antique collector and Chongqing Jiangzhou Group chairman of the
board Chen Ming-liang has been arrested by the police for suspected
involvement in drugs and gambling. It was also reported that Chen
Ming-liang is the son of former State Council Vice-premier Chen Yonggui.
Unfortunately, the two Chen's are not related.

(7) Lusty Big Sister kept 16 strong he-men

According to <Times Weekly> (Guangzhou) in September,
Chongqing crime gang female leader Xie Caiping led a wanton, licentious life
wherein she kept 16 young men for her own enjoyment. In truth, she had
only one 26-year-old boyfriend named Luo.

(8) Public service worker application success rate is 4700:1

<Beijing Times> reported in October that the most popular
public service posts have 4,700 application for each position. The
Human Resources and Social Security Department denied the figure.

(9) C.N. Yang's young wife is three months pregnant

In October, <China Daily> reported that C.N. Yang has
confirmed to the media that his wife Ms. Weng Fan is pregnant. This
became a hot news item until Weng Fan came out to deny it.

(10) The snow in Shijiazhuang was taller than a human

On November 12, <New Express> (Guangdong) posted a photo
entitled <Shijiazhuang citizens cleaning accumulated snow off the roof>.
But the photo turned out to have been taken in Italy in 2008.